|Publication number||US7564803 B1|
|Application number||US 11/215,813|
|Publication date||Jul 21, 2009|
|Filing date||Aug 29, 2005|
|Priority date||Aug 29, 2005|
|Also published as||US7940698|
|Publication number||11215813, 215813, US 7564803 B1, US 7564803B1, US-B1-7564803, US7564803 B1, US7564803B1|
|Inventors||Ina Minei, Kireeti Kompella, Nischal Sheth|
|Original Assignee||Juniper Networks, Inc.|
|Export Citation||BiBTeX, EndNote, RefMan|
|Patent Citations (65), Non-Patent Citations (26), Referenced by (32), Classifications (15), Legal Events (2)|
|External Links: USPTO, USPTO Assignment, Espacenet|
The invention relates to computer networks and, more particularly, to transmission of multicast traffic within a computer network.
A computer network is a collection of interconnected computing devices that exchange data and share resources. In a packet-based network, such as the Internet, the computing devices communicate data by dividing the data into small blocks called packets. The packets are individually routed across the network from a source device to a destination device. The destination device extracts the data from the packets and assembles the data into its original form. Dividing the data into packets enables the source device to resend only those individual packets that may be lost during transmission.
Routing devices within the network, often referred to as routers, maintain routing information that describe available routes through the network. Upon receiving an incoming packet, the router examines information within the packet and forwards the packet in accordance with the routing information. In order to maintain an accurate representation of the network, routers exchange routing information in accordance with one or more defined routing protocols, such as the Interior Gateway Protocol (IGP).
Multi-protocol Label Switching (MPLS) is a mechanism used to engineer traffic patterns within Internet Protocol (IP) networks. By utilizing MPLS, a source device can request a path through a network, i.e., a Label Switched Path (LSP). An LSP defines a distinct path through the network to carry MPLS packets from the source device to a destination device. A short label associated with a particular LSP is affixed to packets that travel through the network via the LSP. Routers along the path cooperatively perform MPLS operations to forward the MPLS packets along the established path. LSPs may be used for a variety of traffic engineering purposes including bandwidth management and quality of service (QoS).
A variety of protocols exist for establishing point-to-point LSPs across a network. For example, one such protocol is the label distribution protocol (LDP). Label switching routers (LSRs) in an MPLS network may use LDP to inform other LSRs of their label assignments. Another protocol is a resource reservation protocol, such as the Resource Reservation Protocol with Traffic Engineering extensions (RSVP-TE).
A service provider may provide multicast services to virtual private network (VPN) customers by setting up point to multi-point (P2MP) LSPs across the service provider network. The service provider may set up P2MP LSPs using RSVP. However, many VPN networks already use LDP, and deploying a second label distribution protocol to set up P2MP LSPs may be impractical. Additionally, RSVP has difficulty scaling in service provider networks that include a large number of provider edge routers.
In general, the invention is directed to techniques for establishing a point to multi-point (P2MP) tunnel from a source network device to one or more destination devices. In particular, the techniques provide for extension of a protocol such as the label distribution protocol (LDP) to allow LDP to set up a P2MP label switched path (LSP) from the source device to each of the destination devices.
In accordance with the principles of the invention, LDP has been extended to create a P2MP label map message containing a label and a P2MP forwarding equivalence class (FEC) element having a root node address and an identifier. The P2MP FEC element may, for example, associate an address of the root node of the P2MP LSP with an opaque identifier. The P2MP FEC element uniquely identifies the P2MP LSP. The P2MP FEC element may be advertised with a label in a P2MP label map message.
The destination network devices initiate the setup and teardown of the P2MP LSP, and P2MP label map messages are propagated from the destination network devices to the source network device. The source network device installs a forwarding state to map traffic into the P2MP LSP for transmission of multicast traffic across the network. An intermediate network device receives a packet from the P2MP LSP and outputs two or more copies of the packet when two or more branches of the P2MP LSP originate at the intermediate device.
In one embodiment, a method comprises defining a FEC element for a label distribution protocol that identifies a P2MP LSP, generating a message that specifies the P2MP LSP using the defined FEC element, and communicating the message in accordance with the label distribution protocol to a routing device.
In another embodiment, a method comprises receiving a first request for a label associated with a first P2MP LSP, allocating a label for the first P2MP LSP, receiving a second request for a label associated with a second P2MP LSP, and allocating the same label for the second P2MP LSP when one or more destination devices associated with the second P2MP LSP are the same as one or more destination devices associated with the first P2MP LSP.
In another embodiment, a network device comprises a control unit that generates a message having a FEC element that specifies a P2MP LSP and communicates the message in accordance with a label distribution protocol to a routing device.
In a further embodiment, a system comprises a source device, one or more destination devices, and a P2MP LSP that connects the source device to the one or more destination devices in accordance with a label distribution protocol, wherein the label distribution protocol defines a FEC element for identifying the P2MP LSP.
In another embodiment, a system comprises a first source device, a second source device, an intermediate device, one or more destination devices, a first P2MP LSP that connects the first source device to the intermediate device and the one or more destination devices, and a second P2MP LSP that connects the second source device to the intermediate device and the one or more destination devices. The intermediate device allocates the same label for the second P2MP LSP when one or more destination devices associated with the second P2MP LSP are the same as one or more destination devices associated with the first P2MP LSP.
In a further embodiment, a computer-readable medium comprises instructions for causing a programmable processor to define a FEC element for a label distribution protocol that identifies a P2MP LSP, generate a message that specifies the P2MP LSP using the defined FEC element, and communicate the message in accordance with the label distribution protocol to a routing device.
The details of one or more embodiments of the invention are set forth in the accompanying drawings and the description below. Other features, objects, and advantages of the invention will be apparent from the description and drawings, and from the claims.
Source network 10 may comprise any public or private network or the Internet. As shown in
Source router 12, intermediate routers 14, and destination routers 16 maintain routing information that describes available routes through computer network 8. Upon receiving an incoming packet, the routers examine information within the packet and forward the packet in accordance with the routing information. In order to maintain an accurate representation of network 8, the routers exchange routing information, e.g., bandwidth availability of links, in accordance with a defined routing protocol, such as an Interior Gateway Protocol (IGP).
In accordance with principles of the invention, LDP is extended to include label advertisements, a P2MP forwarding equivalence class (FEC) element with an identifier type, and an address of the source router (also referred to as the root node) of the P2MP LSP. The combination of the root node address and the identifier specifies the P2MP LSP. In some cases, there may be several P2MP LSPs rooted at a given root node, each with its own identifier.
In some embodiments, the identifier is treated as an opaque bit string prefix by LDP. The type of the P2MP FEC element is defined such that a router that receives it but does not understand it will simply ignore it, without tearing down the session over which it was received. This may ensure that P2MP LSPs do not impact operation of point to point (P2P) LSPS, and that P2MP LSPS are only set up through nodes that support the necessary extensions.
Further details of the techniques described herein may be found in “Label Distribution Protocol Extensions for Point-to-Multipoint Label Switched Paths,” IETF Internet Draft, March 2005, hereby incorporated by reference.
Destination routers R4, R6, and R8 initiate the setup and teardown of P2MP LSP 26, and propagate labels from the destination routers to source router R1. The root node, R1, installs a forwarding state to map traffic into P2MP LSP 26. In some embodiments, it is assumed that the destination routers R4, R6, and R8 know they are destination routers, and know which router in the network is the root node. In addition, the root node R1 also knows it is the root for the P2MP LSP. Although referred to as the “source” router, the root node R1 may not necessarily be the actual source of the multicast traffic as this may come from a peer network outside network 24.
Destination routers R4, R6, and R8 initiate label messages to set up P2MP LSP 26. For example, R4 first determines the LSR to which it must advertise its label. Unlike conventional LDP mapping, in which label messages are advertised to all neighbor LSRs, R4 uses LDP to determine which LSR lies in the IGP best path to the source router R1 and then advertises label messages only to this LSR. If R4 detects more than one such LSR, only one may be selected to receive the label message advertisements. In the illustrated embodiment, R3 is R4's neighbor that lies on the IGP best path to R1.
Router R4 advertises a label 500 to R3. In addition, R4 also advertises a P2MP label map message having a FEC element that uniquely identifies the LSP. The FEC element, described in further detail below, contains the address of the root of the P2MP LSP (R1) and an opaque identifier. If R3 does not already have a forwarding state for this P2MP FEC element, then the forwarding state is installed in the forwarding table of R3.
Router R3 then sends a P2MP FEC label map message with a label of 600 to R2, after determining that R2 lies on the best path to R1 from the point of view of R3. As above, if R2 does not already have a forwarding state for this P2MP FEC, then the forwarding state is installed in the forwarding table of R2. Finally, R2 sends a P2MP FEC label map message with a label of 700 to the source router R1.
In the same manner, destination router R6 sends a P2MP FEC label map message with a label of 300 to R5, which in turn sends a P2MP FEC label map message with a label of 400 to R3. Upon receiving this label map message from R5, R3 determines that it already has a forwarding state for this particular FEC. R3 then updates its forwarding table to perform packet replication and sets the forwarding table to again forward the label 600. R3 knows that both R4 and R5 belong to the same P2MP LSP based on the P2MP FECs received from R4 and R5.
Label mappings are similarly propagated from destination router R8 to intermediate router R2 for the same P2MP FEC element. Routers R3 and R2 need not propagate additional labels upon receiving labels from routers R5 and R7, respectively. Routers R3 and R2 are capable of recognizing that routers R5 and R7 belong to a P2MP LSP for which a forwarding state has already been installed. Thus, after a branch node receives and propagates the first label map message, it need not propagate further label map messages for the same P2MP LSP.
The techniques described herein may conserve bandwidth since only a single copy of each packet will be sent on any link traversed by the P2MP LSP with the packet replication performed at the branch nodes. Source router R1 sends a single packet with label 700 to R2, R2 replicates the packet, switches the label to 600 for the packet to R3, and switches the label to 200 for the packet to R7. Similarly, when R3 receives the packet from R2 labeled 600, it replicates the packet, switches the label to 400 on the packet for R5, and switches the label to 500 on the packet for R4. In this manner P2MP LSP 26 transmits multicast traffic across LDP network 24.
In some cases, an LSR of P2MP LSP 26 may withdraw from a multicast group associated with P2MP LSP 26. For example, LSR R8 may propagate a withdrawal message to remove the forwarding state from the other LSRs within P2MP LSP 26. Destination router R8 sends a label withdraw message that specifies the label 100 to its upstream router R7. The propagation of withdrawal information proceeds upstream to the first node where packet replication occurs, in this case R2.
Intermediate router R2 receives the label withdraw message from the downstream router R7, updates its forwarding table to delete the label 200 associated with R7 from its forwarding state, and ceases packet replication. R2 does retain the forwarding state for R3. Intermediate router R2 also sends a label release message to downstream router R7. Although described with respect to downstream allocation of MPLS labels, the techniques may also be used with upstream allocation of MPLS labels.
If deleting the forwarding state for a downstream router results in no state remaining for P2MP LSP 26 within R2, then R2 propagates a label withdraw message to the upstream router, R1, in P2MP LSP 26. The procedure for when a root node of a P2MP LSP receives a label withdraw message is the same as for intermediate nodes, except that no label withdraw message is propagated upstream since the root node has no upstream router in the P2MP LSP.
In the case where an LSR participating in a P2MP LSP discovers that its upstream LSR on the best path to the root node has changed (e.g., from U to U′), the LSR may send a label withdraw message to U containing the label the LSR had previously sent to U for the LSP. The LSR may also delete all forwarding state for the P2MP LSP, allocate a new label for the P2MP LSP, send a label map message advertising the new label for the P2MP LSP to U′, and install forwarding state for the new label.
P2MP FEC element 30 may be encoded as illustrated in
If address family 34 is Internet Protocol Version Four (IPv4), address length 36 comprises 4. If address family 34 is IPv6, address length 36 comprises 16. Other address lengths may be defined. If address length 36 does not match the defined length for address family 34, the receiving router may abort processing the message containing the FEC element, and send an “Unknown FEC” notification message to the LDP peer signaling an error. If a FEC type-length-value (TLV) contains a P2MP FEC element, the P2MP FEC element may be the only FEC element in the FEC TLV. The encoding scheme for P2MP FEC element as illustrated in
Router 50 includes a set of interface cards (IFCs) 52A-52N (“IFCs 52”) for communicating packets via inbound links 53A-53N (“inbound links 53”) and outbound links 54A-54N (“outbound links 54”). Router 50 further comprises a control unit 55 that maintains routing information 56. Routing information 56 describes the topology of a network and, in particular, routes through the network. Routing information 56 may include, for example, route data that describes various routes within the network, corresponding next hop data indicating appropriate neighboring devices within the network for each of the routes. Router 50 updates routing information 56 to accurately reflect the topology of the network.
Control unit 55 also maintains forwarding information 57 that associates network destinations with specific next hops and corresponding interface ports. In general, when router 50 receives a multicast packet via one of inbound links 53, Interior Gateway Protocol module 62 (“IGP 62”) determines a destination and associated next hop for the packet in accordance with routing information 46 and control unit 55 forwards the packet on one of outbound links 54 to the corresponding next hop based on the destination of the packet.
In the example of
LDP 60 receives label mappings from other routing devices on inbound links 53, allocates labels, and sends label mappings on outbound links 54. In the event that router 50 comprises a destination router of a desired P2MP LSP, a system administrator or a software agent may invoke LDP 60 to initiate setup of the P2MP LSP through the network. Although described herein for exemplary purposes in reference to LDP, the principles may be applied to extend other protocols, such as other label distribution protocols.
If router 50 receives a P2MP label map message, LDP 60 determines the outbound link 54 on which to send an allocated label by accessing routing information 56 to ascertain the best path as determined by IGP 62. LDP 60 may also consult forwarding information 57 associated with routing information 56 to determine whether router 50 already has a forwarding state for the particular FEC element received in the label map message. If forwarding information 57 already includes the forwarding state, LDP 60 may update forwarding information 57 to do packet replication. Alternatively, forwarding state may be stored in P2MP Data 58 or LDP 60.
LDP 60 maintains P2MP data 58. Depending on the relation of router 50 to the P2MP LSP, P2MP data 58 may store one or more P2MP FEC elements, as described above with respect to P2MP FEC element 30 of
The architecture of router 50 illustrated in
Control unit 52 may be implemented solely in software, or hardware, or may be implemented as a combination of software, hardware, or firmware. For example, control unit 52 may include one or more processors that execute software instructions. In that case, the various software modules of control unit 52, such as LDP 60 and IGP 62, may comprise executable instructions stored on a computer-readable medium, such as computer memory or hard disk.
Network 8 includes P2MP LSP 20 extending from source router 12 to destination routers 16. Destination routers 16 initiate setup of P2MP LSP 20 in network 8. For example, destination router 16B advertises a P2MP label map message to the router determined to be on the IGP best path to source router 12 of P2MP LSP 20, in this case, intermediate router 14B (64). In particular, destination router 16B sends a P2MP label map message of the form (X, Y, L), where L is the label and (X, Y) is a P2MP FEC element with root node address X and opaque identifier Y. The P2MP FEC Element (X, Y) uniquely identifies P2MP LSP 20.
Intermediate router 14B receives the P2MP label map message (X, Y, L) from destination router 16B (66) over an interface I. If intermediate router 14B already has a forwarding state installed for this particular P2MP FEC element (X, Y), then router 14B updates its forwarding table to perform packet replication and adds “swap L, send over interface I” to the next hop. In this case, 14B does not advertise a label map message. If intermediate router 14B does not already have a forwarding state for this P2MP FEC element, then router 14B allocates a label L′ and installs the forwarding state in its forwarding table to swap L′ with L (68). In this case, intermediate router 14B determines the upstream router on the IGP best path to source router 12 and advertises to the upstream router a P2MP label map message (X, Y, L′) containing the allocated label and the P2MP FEC element (X, Y) (70).
Source router 12 receives the P2MP label map message (X, Y, L′) from intermediate router 14B and determines whether it already has forwarding state for (X, Y) (72). If not, source router 12 creates the forwarding state to push label L′ onto the traffic that source router 12 forwards over P2MP LSP 20. A similar process of label propagation takes place from destination routers 16A and 16C to set up the other branches of P2MP LSP 20.
Source router 12 receives multicast traffic from source network 10 (74). Source router 12 then forwards the multicast packet according to its forwarding table. Specifically, source router 12 forwards the multicast packet on P2MP LSP 20 (76). Source router 12 pushes a forwarding label onto the packet that identifies the next hop along P2MP LSP 20.
The packet is transmitted to one of intermediate routers 14A and 14B based on the label affixed to the packet. Intermediate router 14B, for example, receives the packet from source router 12 (78). Intermediate router 14B duplicates the packet to make a copy for each of the branches of P2MP LSP 20 for which it has a next hop in its forwarding table (80). Intermediate router 14B then switches the labels and forwards a copy of the packet on each of the branches of P2MP LSP 20 (82). Intermediate router 14B pushes a forwarding label onto the first copy of the packet that identifies the next hop as destination router 16B. Intermediate router 14B also pushes a forwarding label onto the second copy of the packet that identifies the next hop as intermediate router 14C. Destination router 16B receives the packet from intermediate router 14B (84).
In this embodiment, the initiators of the P2MP LSP setup process are the source routers, not the destination routers. As illustrated in
The embodiment of
Intermediate router R2 is directly connected to R7, so R2 sends a request for the R7 label to router R7 and receives a reply from R7 identifying its label as 300. Intermediate router R2 also sends a request to intermediate router R3 for the labels of R4 and R5. Destination router R4 sends a reply identifying its label as 200, and R5 sends a reply identifying its label as 100. R3 replies to R2 identifying the R3 label as 500, and R2 replies to R1 identifying the R2 label as 600. Intermediate router R2 may send this label reply immediately after receiving the request for label mapping from R1, or R2 may wait until it receives replies from the destination routers before sending the label reply.
Suppose that source router R8 wants to set up a separate P2MP LSP to destination routers R4, R5, and R6. Source router R8 sends a label request to the router that lies on the IGP best path to these destination routers, in this case, intermediate router R2. Intermediate router R2 receives the request for a label from R8. The request asks for the labels for destination routers R4, R5, and R6.
Intermediate router R2 already has a label for the (R4, R5) portion of the request, based on the requests from R1 in setting up the first P2MP LSP. Intermediate router R2 shares the label between the first P2MP LSP and the second P2MP LSP by re-using the label 500 previously set up for the first P2MP LSP. Intermediate router R2 is directly connected to R6, so R2 sends a request for the R6 label to router R6 and receives a reply from R6 identifying its label as 800. Intermediate router R2 replies to source router R8 with the label 700. Intermediate router R2 may send this label reply immediately after receiving the request for label mapping from R8, or R2 may wait until it receives replies from the destination routers before sending the label reply.
In the illustrated embodiments, two separate P2MP LSPs are set up across network 90. The first has source router R1 and destination routers R4, R5, and R7, and the second has source router R8 and destination routers R4, R5, and R6. The P2MP LSPs are set up such that intermediate router R2 shares labels between the two P2MP LSPs. This may result in less state information being stored in the core of the network, which may help with state preservation.
According to the forwarding tables of intermediate router R2, if R2 receives a multicast packet with label 600, R2 swaps the label with 500 if the packet is to R3, and with 300 if the packet is to R7. If R2 receives a multicast packet with label 700, it swaps the label with 500 if the packet is to R3, and with 800 if the packet is to R6.
Various embodiments of the invention have been described. These and other embodiments are within the scope of the following claims.
|Cited Patent||Filing date||Publication date||Applicant||Title|
|US5600642||Sep 13, 1995||Feb 4, 1997||Alcatel N.V.||Method for modifying a multicast tree in a switching network|
|US6374303 *||Nov 12, 1998||Apr 16, 2002||Lucent Technologies, Inc.||Explicit route and multicast tree setup using label distribution|
|US6477166||Jun 30, 2000||Nov 5, 2002||Marconi Communications, Inc.||System, method and switch for an MPLS network and an ATM network|
|US6493349||Nov 13, 1998||Dec 10, 2002||Nortel Networks Limited||Extended internet protocol virtual private network architectures|
|US6501754 *||Aug 7, 1998||Dec 31, 2002||Kabushiki Kaisha Toshiba||Scheme for label switched path loop detection at node device|
|US6553028||Apr 30, 1999||Apr 22, 2003||Cisco Technology, Inc.||Method and apparatus for multicast switching using a centralized switching engine|
|US6731652||Mar 9, 2001||May 4, 2004||Metro Packet Systems Inc.||Dynamic packet processor architecture|
|US6751218||Feb 26, 2000||Jun 15, 2004||Avaya Technology Corp.||Method and system for ATM-coupled multicast service over IP networks|
|US6778531||Sep 29, 2000||Aug 17, 2004||Lucent Technologies Inc.||Multicast routing with service-level guarantees between ingress egress-points in a packet network|
|US6807182||Jan 31, 2000||Oct 19, 2004||3Com Corporation||Stacked network devices including a protocol engine and distributed trunk ports and method of operating same|
|US6879594 *||Jun 7, 2000||Apr 12, 2005||Nortel Networks Limited||System and method for loop avoidance in multi-protocol label switching|
|US6920503||Oct 28, 2000||Jul 19, 2005||Redback Networks Inc.||Tunnel interworking|
|US7035226 *||Jan 4, 2001||Apr 25, 2006||Fujitsu Limited||Path setup device and method for label switching network|
|US7039687||Aug 7, 1998||May 2, 2006||Nortel Networks Limited||Multi-protocol label switching virtual private networks|
|US7082102 *||Sep 20, 2001||Jul 25, 2006||Bellsouth Intellectual Property Corp.||Systems and methods for policy-enabled communications networks|
|US7133928||Jun 19, 2003||Nov 7, 2006||Yahoo! Inc.||Performing multicast communication in computer networks by using overlay routing|
|US7251218||Oct 24, 2002||Jul 31, 2007||Van Drebbel Mariner Llc||Method and computer program product for internet protocol (IP)-flow classification in a wireless point to multi-point (PtMP) transmission system|
|US7269135||Apr 4, 2002||Sep 11, 2007||Extreme Networks, Inc.||Methods and systems for providing redundant connectivity across a network using a tunneling protocol|
|US7281058||Oct 9, 2002||Oct 9, 2007||Juniper Networks, Inc.||Delivering and receiving multicast content across a unicast network|
|US7330468||Nov 18, 2002||Feb 12, 2008||At&T Corp.||Scalable, reconfigurable routers|
|US7333491||Apr 30, 2003||Feb 19, 2008||Realtek Semiconductor Corp.||Method and apparatus for packet forwarding in a switch controller|
|US7359328 *||Mar 11, 2003||Apr 15, 2008||Nortel Networks Limited||Apparatus for using a verification probe in an LDP MPLS network|
|US20020071390 *||Oct 17, 2001||Jun 13, 2002||Mike Reeves||System and method for estabilishing a commucication path associated with an MPLS implementation on an ATM platform|
|US20020118644||Aug 31, 2001||Aug 29, 2002||Ian Moir||Method and system to implement policy-based network traffic management|
|US20020181477||Jan 11, 2002||Dec 5, 2002||Fujitsu Network Communications, Inc.||System and method of virtual private network route target filtering|
|US20020191584||Jun 6, 2001||Dec 19, 2002||Motorola, Inc.||Dense mode IP multicast call scoping in a wireless communication system|
|US20030012215||Jul 16, 2001||Jan 16, 2003||Ibm Corporation||Methods and arrangements for establishing a group collaboration session utilizing multiple multicast distribution trees|
|US20030021282||Jun 21, 2002||Jan 30, 2003||Hospodor Andrew D.||Providing streaming media data|
|US20030031175||Aug 1, 2001||Feb 13, 2003||Masato Hayashi||Method of multicasting|
|US20030043772||Aug 30, 2001||Mar 6, 2003||Mathis James E.||System and methods for distributed connection and mobility processing in a multicast IP network incorporating multi-cell location areas|
|US20030088696||Nov 18, 2002||May 8, 2003||Fastforward Networks, Inc.||Performing multicast communication in computer networks by using overlay routing|
|US20030099235||Nov 27, 2002||May 29, 2003||Shin Yong Sik||Method of routing point-to-multipoint traffic on an MPLS network|
|US20030112748||Dec 17, 2001||Jun 19, 2003||Puppa Gary J.||System and method for detecting failures and re-routing connections in a communication network|
|US20030123446||Dec 17, 2002||Jul 3, 2003||Muirhead Charles S.||System for supply chain management of virtual private network services|
|US20030177221||Mar 18, 2003||Sep 18, 2003||Hamid Ould-Brahim||Resource allocation using an auto-discovery mechanism for provider-provisioned layer-2 and layer-3 Virtual Private Networks|
|US20030191937||Apr 4, 2002||Oct 9, 2003||Joel Balissat||Multipoint server for providing secure, scaleable connections between a plurality of network devices|
|US20040037279||Aug 23, 2002||Feb 26, 2004||David Zelig||Virtual private LAN service using a multicast protocol|
|US20040047342||Jun 13, 2003||Mar 11, 2004||Polycom, Inc.||Multipoint multimedia/audio conference using IP trunking|
|US20040081154||May 1, 2003||Apr 29, 2004||Cisco Technology, Inc.||Internal BGP downloader|
|US20040151181||Feb 4, 2003||Aug 5, 2004||Chu Thomas P.||Methods and systems for providing MPLS-based layer-2 virtual private network services|
|US20040190517||Mar 31, 2003||Sep 30, 2004||Anupam Gupta||Method and apparatus for routing a packet within a plurality of nodes arranged in a line or a tree given a maximum stack depth|
|US20040218536||Dec 10, 2003||Nov 4, 2004||Nippon Telegraph And Telephone Corp.||Multicast communication path calculation method and multicast communication path calculation apparatus|
|US20050018693||Jun 24, 2004||Jan 27, 2005||Broadcom Corporation||Fast filtering processor for a highly integrated network device|
|US20050027782||Aug 1, 2003||Feb 3, 2005||Rajkumar Jalan||Method for providing scalable multicast service in a virtual private LAN service|
|US20050097203||Jan 8, 2004||May 5, 2005||Nortel Networks Limited||Autodiscovery for virtual networks|
|US20050108419||Jun 17, 2004||May 19, 2005||Eubanks Thomas M.||Multicast peering|
|US20050111351||Oct 27, 2004||May 26, 2005||Naiming Shen||Nexthop fast rerouter for IP and MPLS|
|US20050169270||Mar 29, 2005||Aug 4, 2005||Ryoichi Mutou||Router, frame forwarding method, and lower layer frame virtual forwarding system|
|US20050232193||Feb 28, 2005||Oct 20, 2005||Jorgensen Jacob W||Transmission control protocol/internet protocol (TCP/IP) packet-centric wireless point to multi-point (PtMP) transmission system architecture|
|US20050262232||Jul 30, 2004||Nov 24, 2005||Alcatel||Architecture for configuration and management of cross-domain network services|
|US20050281192||Jun 18, 2004||Dec 22, 2005||Cisco Technology, Inc.||Consistency between MPLS forwarding and control planes|
|US20060013141 *||Dec 29, 2004||Jan 19, 2006||Fujitsu Limited||Loop frame detecting device and method for detecting loop frame|
|US20060039364 *||Oct 13, 2005||Feb 23, 2006||Wright Steven A||Systems and methods for policy-enabled communications networks|
|US20060047851||Aug 25, 2004||Mar 2, 2006||Cisco Technoloy, Inc.||Computer network with point-to-point pseudowire redundancy|
|US20060147204||Feb 6, 2004||Jul 6, 2006||Nippon Telegraph And Telephone Corporation||Multicast transfer route setting method, and multicast label switching method for implementing former method|
|US20060153067||Dec 14, 2004||Jul 13, 2006||Jean-Phillipe Vasseur||Border router protection with backup tunnel stitching in a computer network|
|US20060182034||Dec 12, 2003||Aug 17, 2006||Eric Klinker||Topology aware route control|
|US20060221958 *||Oct 19, 2005||Oct 5, 2006||Ijsbrand Wijnands||PIM sparse-mode emulation over MPLS LSP's|
|US20070036162||Sep 12, 2006||Feb 15, 2007||Alcatel Ip Networks, Inc.||Source identifier for MAC address learning|
|US20070098003||Nov 2, 2005||May 3, 2007||Arjen Boers||System and method for performing key-based refresh of routing information|
|US20070140107||Dec 16, 2005||Jun 21, 2007||Toerless Eckert||Multicast operations using prioritized state information|
|US20080123654||Feb 6, 2008||May 29, 2008||Tse-Au Elizabeth Suet H||Scalable reconfigurable router|
|KR20040001206A||Title not available|
|WO2002091670A2||May 3, 2002||Nov 14, 2002||Marconi Comm Spa||Method for distributed multicast routing in connection-oriented networks and network for applying this method|
|WO2004071032A1||Feb 6, 2004||Aug 19, 2004||Nippon Telegraph & Telephone||Multicast transfer route setting method, and multicast label switching method for implementing former method|
|1||Aggarwal et al., "Establishing Point to Multipoint MPLS TE LSPs," submitted to Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Feb. 11, 2007, pp. 1-15.|
|2||Atlas et al., "MPLS RSVP-TE Interoperability for Local Protection/Fast Reroute," IETF, Jul. 2001, pp. 1-14.|
|3||B. Zhang and H. Mouftah, "A Destination-initiated Multicast Routing Protocol for Shortest Path Tree Constructions," GLOBECOM 2003, IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference, XP010677629, pp. 2840-2844.|
|4||D. Awduche et al., "RFC 3209-RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP Tunnels," Network Working Group, Dec. 2001, 64 pgs. http://rfc.sunsite.dk/rfc/rfc3209html.|
|5||Eric C. Rosen et al., "Multicast in MPLS/BGP IP VPNs," draft-rosen-vpn-mcast-07.txt, May 2004, 27 pgs.|
|6||K. Kompella et al., "Virtual Private LAN Service," draft-ietf-12vpn-vpls-bgp-00.txt, May 2003, 22 pgs.|
|7||L. Martini et al., "Encapsulation Methods for Transport of Layer 2 Frames Over IP and MPLS Networks," Network Working Group Internet Draft, draft-martini-12circuit-encap-mpls-04.txt, Nov. 2001, 17 pgs.|
|8||L. Martini et al., "Transport of Layer 2 Frames Over MPLS," Network Working Group Internet Draft, draft-martini-12circuit-trans-mpls-08.txt, Nov. 2001, 18 pgs.|
|9||RSVP-TE: Resource Reservation Protocol-Traffic Extension, Javvin Company, 2 pgs, printed Apr. 18, 2005. http://www.javvin.com/protocolRSVPTE.html.|
|10||Steven Deering et al., "Protocol Independent Multicast-Sparse Mode (PIM-SM): Motivation and Architecture," draft-ietf-idmr-pim-arch-05.txt, Aug. 4, 1998, 30 pgs.|
|11||U.S. Appl. No. 11/056,383, entitled "Fast Reroute Of Traffic Associated With A Point To Multi-Point Network Tunnel," filed Feb. 10, 2005.|
|12||U.S. Appl. No. 11/192,432, entitled "Transmission of Layer Two (L2) Multicast Traffic Over Multi-Protocol Label Switching Networks," filed Jul. 28, 2005.|
|13||U.S. Appl. No. 11/212,475, entitled "Label Switching Muticast Trees For Multicast Virtual Private Networks," filed Aug. 26, 2005.|
|14||U.S. Appl. No. 11/212,490, entitled "Multicast Data Trees For Virtual Private Local Area Network (LAN) Service Multicast," filed Aug. 26, 2005.|
|15||U.S. Appl. No. 11/212,500, entitled "Multicast Data Trees For Multicast Virtual Private Networks," filed Aug. 26, 2005.|
|16||U.S. Appl. No. 11/212,507, entitled "Reliable Exchange Of Control Information For Multicast Virtual Private Networks," filed Aug. 26, 2005.|
|17||U.S. Appl. No. 11/212,509, entitled "Aggregate Multicast Trees For Multicast Virtual Private Networks," filed Aug. 26, 2005.|
|18||U.S. Appl. No. 11/212,932, entitled "Multicast Trees For Virtual Private Local Area Network (LAN) Service Multicast," filed Aug. 26, 2005.|
|19||U.S. Appl. No. 11/213,636, entitled "Transport Of Control And Data Traffic For Multicast Virtual Private Networks," filed Aug. 26, 2005.|
|20||U.S. Appl. No. 11/213,637, entitled "Aggregate Multicast Trees For Virtual Private Local Area Network (LAN) Service Multicast," filed Aug. 26, 2005.|
|21||U.S. Appl. No. 11/213,638, entitled "Shared Multicast Trees For Multicast Virtual Private Networks," filed Aug. 26, 2005.|
|22||U.S. Appl. No. 11/213,639, entitled "Exchange of Control Information For Virtual Private Local Area Network (LAN) Service Multicast," filed Aug. 26, 2005.|
|23||U.S. Appl. No. 11/213,640, entitled "Auto-Discovery Of Multicast Virtual Private Networks," filed Aug. 26, 2005.|
|24||U.S. Appl. No. 11/213,641, entitled "Inter-Autonomous System (AS) Multicast Virtual Private Networks," filed Aug. 26, 2005.|
|25||Y. Rekhter et al., "A Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4)," Mar. 1995, 72 pgs.|
|26||Yasukawa et al. "Requirements for Point to Multipoint extension to RSVP-TE," IETF, Oct. 2003, pp. 1-20.|
|Citing Patent||Filing date||Publication date||Applicant||Title|
|US7769873||Oct 25, 2002||Aug 3, 2010||Juniper Networks, Inc.||Dynamically inserting filters into forwarding paths of a network device|
|US7894439 *||Aug 7, 2008||Feb 22, 2011||Fujitsu Limited||Communication device in a virtual private network using a multi protocol label switch|
|US7940698||Jul 8, 2009||May 10, 2011||Juniper Networks, Inc.||Point to multi-point label switched paths with label distribution protocol|
|US7957386||Apr 14, 2009||Jun 7, 2011||Juniper Networks, Inc.||Inter-autonomous system (AS) multicast virtual private networks|
|US7983261||Jul 6, 2009||Jul 19, 2011||Juniper Networks, Inc.||Reliable exchange of control information for multicast virtual private networks|
|US7990963||May 20, 2009||Aug 2, 2011||Juniper Networks, Inc.||Exchange of control information for virtual private local area network (LAN) service multicast|
|US7990965||Jul 28, 2005||Aug 2, 2011||Juniper Networks, Inc.||Transmission of layer two (L2) multicast traffic over multi-protocol label switching networks|
|US8064441 *||Oct 22, 2007||Nov 22, 2011||Cisco Technology, Inc.||Upstream label allocation on Ethernets for MP2MP LSPS|
|US8068492||Apr 21, 2009||Nov 29, 2011||Juniper Networks, Inc.||Transport of control and data traffic for multicast virtual private networks|
|US8078758||Jun 5, 2003||Dec 13, 2011||Juniper Networks, Inc.||Automatic configuration of source address filters within a network device|
|US8111633||Jul 6, 2009||Feb 7, 2012||Juniper Networks, Inc.||Multicast trees for virtual private local area network (LAN) service multicast|
|US8121056||Jul 2, 2009||Feb 21, 2012||Juniper Networks, Inc.||Aggregate multicast trees for multicast virtual private networks|
|US8218540 *||Dec 28, 2007||Jul 10, 2012||World Wide Packets, Inc.||Modifying a duplicated packet and forwarding encapsulated packets|
|US8310957||Mar 9, 2010||Nov 13, 2012||Juniper Networks, Inc.||Minimum-cost spanning trees of unicast tunnels for multicast distribution|
|US8363667||Apr 18, 2011||Jan 29, 2013||Juniper Networks, Inc.||Summarization and longest-prefix match within MPLS networks|
|US8391185 *||May 23, 2008||Mar 5, 2013||Cisco Technology, Inc.||Method to transport bidir PIM over a multiprotocol label switched network|
|US8422514||Apr 7, 2010||Apr 16, 2013||Juniper Networks, Inc.||Dynamic configuration of cross-domain pseudowires|
|US8462635||Aug 30, 2010||Jun 11, 2013||Juniper Networks, Inc.||Resource reservation protocol with traffic engineering point to multi-point label switched path hierarchy|
|US8488614||Nov 22, 2010||Jul 16, 2013||Juniper Networks, Inc.||Upstream label assignment for the label distribution protocol|
|US8514850 *||Aug 29, 2008||Aug 20, 2013||Alcatel Lucent||Method for establishing a bidirectional point-to-point connection|
|US8625465||Apr 16, 2012||Jan 7, 2014||Juniper Networks, Inc.||Auto-discovery of virtual private networks|
|US8767731 *||May 18, 2011||Jul 1, 2014||Alcatel Lucent||Method and apparatus for MPLS label allocation for a BGP MAC-VPN|
|US8767741||Dec 17, 2010||Jul 1, 2014||Juniper Networks, Inc.||Upstream label assignment for the resource reservation protocol with traffic engineering|
|US8837479||Jun 27, 2012||Sep 16, 2014||Juniper Networks, Inc.||Fast reroute between redundant multicast streams|
|US8917729||Dec 8, 2011||Dec 23, 2014||Juniper Networks, Inc.||Fast reroute for multiple label switched paths sharing a single interface|
|US8953500||Mar 29, 2013||Feb 10, 2015||Juniper Networks, Inc.||Branch node-initiated point to multi-point label switched path signaling with centralized path computation|
|US8982881||Sep 30, 2013||Mar 17, 2015||Cisco Technology, Inc.||Upstream label allocation on ethernets for MP2MP LSPS|
|US8988982||Oct 11, 2012||Mar 24, 2015||Electronics And Telecommunications Research Institute||Method and apparatus for protection switching in point-to-multipoint network|
|US9049148||Sep 28, 2012||Jun 2, 2015||Juniper Networks, Inc.||Dynamic forwarding plane reconfiguration in a network device|
|US9049233||Feb 6, 2013||Jun 2, 2015||Cisco Technology, Inc.||MPLS segment-routing|
|US9083632||Mar 4, 2013||Jul 14, 2015||Cisco Technology, Inc.||Method to transport bidir PIM over a multiprotocol label switched network|
|US20110286452 *||Nov 24, 2011||Florin Balus||Method and apparatus for mpls label allocation for a bgp mac-vpn|
|U.S. Classification||370/254, 370/401, 370/390|
|International Classification||H04L12/28, H04L12/56|
|Cooperative Classification||H04L45/16, H04L45/302, H04L45/50, H04L45/507, H04L45/00|
|European Classification||H04L45/16, H04L45/50C, H04L45/302, H04L45/50, H04L45/00|
|Oct 17, 2005||AS||Assignment|
Owner name: JUNIPER NETWORKS, INC., CALIFORNIA
Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNORS:MINEI, INA;KOMPELLA, KIREETI;SHETH, NISCHAL;REEL/FRAME:017086/0647;SIGNING DATES FROM 20050926 TO 20051004
|Jan 21, 2013||FPAY||Fee payment|
Year of fee payment: 4